About your Search

20121112
20121120
STATION
MSNBCW 13
CSPAN2 11
MSNBC 10
CSPAN 6
CNN 2
CNNW 2
WHUT (Howard University Television) 2
KNTV (NBC) 1
KQED (PBS) 1
LANGUAGE
English 55
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 55 (some duplicates have been removed)
included willson, eisenhower, nixon, ronald reagan and clinton. the competitive battle to the president and congress dates to the site george washington had in the congress over the treaty. he had won approval only after standing considerable efforts looking directly with members of congress compromising and cudgeling and that was with the congress having the majority of white thinking federalists' a president who was revered in a national hero. when the democrats won the majority in congress and the second term eisenhower worked quietly behind the scenes with the senate majority leader lyndon johnson to gain approval in the legislative agenda. the legislative goals compromised as they were it might be cynical to postulate some of nixon's the fight rather liberal legislation was prompted by the desire to get along with a democratic controlled congress. woodrow wilson was the target of the republican party that wanted to even media squabble they had with the president. he defeated both william howard taft and theodore roosevelt to win his first term. he still had a liberal legislation op
the republican party was dead. the ideas of the great society and liberalism had one. years later, ronald reagan was elected governor of california. four years later, richard nixon was president. they have something the democrats did not have. they have a great post-boomer generation and trade when you think of them, -- a generation. when you think of them, that is a pretty good bench of energetic, slick, youngish politicians. when you are talking about the democratic party you are talking about joe biden and hillary clinton. we might prefer them to the republican contenders but that is a different generation. there is not this deep democratic bench. >> mr. obama has won a second term. what is your sense of the kind of legacy that he wants to leave in the second term. is he going to be more progressive. toss me about obama's future right quick. >> -- tell me about obama's feature right quick. >> he wants to have a very free pass toward enactment. he would like to fix the fiscal stuff that is on the table even as we speak. i want to believe but i do not have any reason to believe that he would wa
the roll. quorum call: quorum call: >> administrator, thank you for being here at ronald reagan national airport. as we look at the holidays fast approaching, thanksgiving next week, we're anticipating a busy travel season again, and the men and women of tsa are standing at the ready to provide the most effective security in the most effective way. as you know, that creates challenges and opportunities for the traveling public, quorum call: a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from colorado. mr. udall: mr. president, we're in a quorum call, is that correct? the presiding officer: the senator is correct. mr. udall: i ask unanimous consent the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. udall: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. udall: mr. president, i ask the chair lay before the senate a message from the house with respect to s. 743. the presiding officer: the clerk will re
if ronald reagan sent troops to the middle east and hundreds were killed and reagan just cut and ran? >> caller: oh, absolutely. >> john: chris thank you for the call. benghazi is not going to go away, and that's why i'm so thankful for media outlets for -- well like what you have right here peter. >> we do what we can. >> john: we're taking your calls at 866-55-press, we'll be right back, talking about the the -- horror that is the american music awards and much more. >> announcer: this is the "bill press show." >>tax cuts don't create jobs. the golden years as the conservatives call them, we had the highest tax rates, and the highest amount of growth, and the highest amount of jobs. those are facts. >>"if you ever raise taxes on the rich, you're going to destroy our economy." not true! ♪ >> announcer: chatting with you live at current.com/billpress. this is the "bill press show." >> john: this is the "bill press show." i am not bill press, i'm john fugelsang. happy to be filling in with peter and dan and the whole crew. what are the comments. >> we're tweeting @bpshow
of the line of the conservative era that began coherently with ronald reagan in 1980. mitt romney was the ultimate remainderman. that's why they have an easier time of dumping on him right now. >> so the clown car has backed up to run over mitt romney. that's your image for tonight, howard. >> yes, it is. >> that woman who didn't like her husband, she drove over the guy in the parking lot a few years back then drove back over him again. i don't want to get involved in that legal case, but i do remember the pictures. let's go to john here. is this the clown cars as howard beautifully put it backing up over the guy that outdorked them and won the election even though he's no more or less dorky than they were? your thoughts. >> some of these people are not certifiable clowns who are saying these things about romney. i don't disagree with howard's characterization in general, i do think it's fair to say that part of romney's problem was that he was really always an incredibly bad fit with the republican party at almost every level. he was not most of the things the republican party is
she would be younger than ronald reagan was when he became president. >> as appealing as jeb bush would be as a candidate, i think hillary has an advantage here because so many women, republicans as well, would love to vote for hillary clinton, put her as the first lady in the white house. >> i spent the last year in an election and refused to answer that question. [laughter] >> hillary clinton made a lot of friends as secretary of state. some of them were republicans, not traditional fans of clinton. jeb bush is a very likable candidate. but i'd guess that hillary is really -- she works hard at this nomination, she can unify the party big-time and i bet she'll have obama supporting her. chris: and especially if the economy is good the next four years. thanks for the great round table. that's the show. thanks for watching and don't forget that the victims of hurricane sandy are really hurting right now. especially after that new york, new jersey area. these tragedies hurting real families like yours. give them a lift. go to the red cross website. we'll see you back here next week.
-- no more responsible for what happened in benghazi than george bush was for september 11th or ronald reagan with the blowing up of the u.s. marines in beirut. >> now david petraeus will testify about the benghazi attack tomorrow, exactly a week after he resigned cite an extramarital affair. and there is word secretary of state hillary clinton will testify on benghazi next month. here is the latest from the pentagon on the petraeus scandal. first let's get to katherine who is live in washington. katherine, the scope of all of this is pretty unusual. >> well those two classified hearings bring together the government's top intelligence and law enforcement officials. what was clear was the president's comments on ambassador susan rice is really getting some traction. one republican alleging that, quote, the president misinformed and lied to the american people over the benghazi affair. what was also clear is that the president wants to promote ambassador susan rice. even though she said benghazi was a spontaneous attack when it seemed clear it was terrorism. >> president obama has the gal to f
conference after being re-elected to a second term as president, then president ronald reagan was asked if he had anything to say to the people in the country who did not vote for him and who did not feel that they were part of the reagan revolution. he was also asked about nancy reagan falling down and bumping her head right before the election. he said that she had a tender lump on the side of her head, but that she would be fine. in president clinton's first press conference, after he was re-elected to a second term, the president started to answer a question about the role of first lady hillary clinton in the second clinton term, before he sort of diverted himself into talking about just how damned tired he was. >> well, let me answer the question about hillary. i think what first lady will do is something that i think it will be consistent with what she's been doing, but we have not, frankly, we've been too tired to talk about it. yesterday, i'm embarrassed to tell the american people, i actually slept past noon. i was tired. >> there's no shame in that. >> in the first press conference
goal, like ronald reagan used to do, i want one headline, don't let the middle class be held hostage. he repeated it over and over again. >> reporter: he said it 19 times. >> he didn't want the headline to be switched by adversarial press or neutral press that didn't to want go with his line to say him, adamant, president adamant on rich paying 39.6%. maybe that's why you softened up to you. just an interpretation. >> reporter: i can tell you congressional republicans were happy with his response. they like to know there is some give. here's where the give could be, chris. nobody's talked about this. i mean, there's been some behind the scenes chatter on this, which is you could see tax rates temporarily go up just not all the way to 39%. it could be somewhere in the middle. ends up being the compromise for the one year. don't forget, this is all about setting the tax rates simply for 2013, while they negotiate larger tax reform. so, that could be what the wiggle room is. obviously, republicans have said they don't want to raise tax rates at all. they're fine with revenue. and the pr
intellect or exercise in ideology. i covered ronald reagan for six years. and if you want to discuss it some more, i can tell what you i learned in those six years of covering the presidency. it with a lot different than than what i thought it was going to be. it became clear to me that to a large degree, it is a test of the president's will and purpose. to believe in a few big things, to stand steady against the swirl of political controversy, opinion, nowadays, that's certainly not true for the presidents in this book. polls, advice from counselors, all kinds of things that would drive a president away from his core convictions to not necessarily do what he believed in or what he really believed to be best for the country. this is a book about character, about 16 presidents from george washington to george w. bush who all in a moment of national crisis did what they in their hearts believe was the right thing for the country, who showed character. not necessarily what turned out to be right. think there's some decisions they made that i don't know i agree with. and you can certainly argue
petitions. they did not threaten third- party movements. in a nutshell, what ronald reagan understood was a conservatism was not defined by its resentment. but which actually had a smile on its face. much like reagan himself. that is why it into a curious sort of way, it seems republicans, not out of breath out -- not out of nostalgia am i think for conservatives you can do a lot worse thing go back and look at the real reagan. the pragmatic reagan. the reagan who was willing under certain circumstances to raise taxes. the reagan willing to put dick on his ticket in '76 or george bush four years later. >> the tax policies that some precedent. do you think the fiscal cliff and the presence of the debt ceiling are enough to overcome this culture of obstruction? >> i am not sure it will overcome the culture of destruction. that is in many ways an outgrowth of the political system that we have built. on the other hand, you may not have to overcome the culture of obstruction. only have to pick up -- pick off x number members of congress. >> he said it was time for republicans to stopping t
was it, 1982 or 1983, back in the 1980's, tip o'neill and ronald reagan got together and made adjustments to social security that saved the program. that's my point. sometimes you need to adjust and change to save the very thing you care most about. and so tip o'neill didn't sell out the democratic party by embracing that agreement. the democrats in congress, many of them very progressive at that time who supported it, didn't work traders to the party. if we do it in a responsible way, a balanced and doesn't just gut the programs and just not all entitlement reform with no revenue, i think the base of the party and leaders and organized labor will understand. they also know the alternative is doing nothing, with bad damage to jobs and the economy. and ultimately insolvency of these programs themselves, or. b, the right wing of the republicans are coming in and taking over because we have done nothing to solve the problem and their answer to the solution would be much more draconian. host: jack. he's our first phone call for the senator. republican. go ahead. caller: mr. bayh, one question
of the major puzzles and challenges for the republican party now as it was a generation ago. ronald reagan in part with the help of jack kemp, a generation ago, found a way to sell supply side economics as a blue collar alternative. to sell it to the common man. that's what reagan and kemp were all about. the republicans lost the ability to do that. they lost the argument once. they're going to have to figure out how to make that argument again because if they're going to say that unleashing the power of the free market is the route forward for the middle class and the working people of america, they need convincing arguments and convincing people to do it. mitt romney, if you look at it from even the slightest distance, was arguably the worst possible carrier of that message. they need somebody else. they need to southern populism or populism from somewhere, but they also need the proof. they need the evidence. and lacking the evidence last time in the election of a week ago, a week or two ago, people went with the -- what they knew, which was the president's belief in the power of govern
. in the last 100 years, only four, right. so eisenhower, fdr, ronald reagan and barack obama. i think the idea that barack obama does not have a historic mandate when 44 men have been president and seven did what he did in two terms, he got 69 million votes the first time, 62 million votes the second time, i think he has a mandate. the things to be done that are great in this election happened to fall on the progressive side, in part because the republican party and conservatism has gone so far right things that used to be centrist, like environmentalism, which was a teddy roosevelt thing which even richard nixon was in favor of. >> john mccain. >> newt gingrich. >> these things have been now reclassed as liberal, right. the victories that the president has a chance to get which are historic, like on climate change, on immigration, are now progressive ideas because they've been left behind. >> it's now almost up to the republican party to grab a piece of that pie to say this is our victory too when in reality if they had done it earlier -- >> let's don't get in debate about the mandate. you ma
debate. president carter had one debate in 1980. ronald reagan decisively won that. we did not want to continue that sad and torn history. it is not like we were naiive about the challenge. for a lot of reasons, not all of them, you know we did not execute. strategicly, myself and others could have done a better job. the president said that he had an off night. it is not like we had one glaring mistake. but not a solid performance. governor romney had a strong performance and we knew that. even when he took a flyer against ted kennedy. he dominated the debate performance. we knew it was a strength of governor romney. just showing up on the stage and, you know, he was going to come out of the debate like that. we knew that. he was too low. romney is always go to get 47 and 48 and 49 in states like virginia and florida and virginia. we were not go to win the first debate. he was the only person on that stage that had something to gain out of the first debate. but obviously we had a poor performance and he had a very strong performance. we said it publicly and most did not believe at t
-carrying member of the aarp. ronald reagan was 69 when he first ran for president. many worried he was too old for the job until his famous quip during a debate. >> i will not make age an issue of this campaign. i am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent's youth and inexperience. >> yes, reagan used age to his advantage. but seriously, how old is too old? remember senator strom thurman who commuted from walter reed to the capitol at the age of 100? his aides had to vote for him. of course, this argument isn't limited to the world of politics. ageism rages in the role world, too. how often have you heard those under 30 grumbling about those old guys sucking up all the jobs? so the talk back question of the day, should politicians have a mandatory retirement age? facebook.com/carolcnn. your responses later this hour. still the most dependable, longest-lasting full-size pickups on the road. and now we've also been recognized for lowest total cost of ownership -- based on important things, like depreciation, fuel, and maintenance costs. and now trade up to get a 2012 chevy silv
in this is when you have on the table in terms of tax reform, entitlement reform would make ronald reagan look like a piker. so alan murray wrote the classic book on tax reform. he knows how hard it was, with some or very good people. >> [inaudible] [laughter] >> so the point is, in the fess fess -- fiscal cliff or in this period you're not going to get my of this done. joe lieberman outlined what would be a potential approach. you do some sort of cutting, maybe a little bit of some modest revenue, you then move back to regular order which trent lott was talking about last year, but then you need some mechanism like a simpson-bowles ii to enforce the discipline. my worry is, and this is where i disagree with austan. you read bob woodward's book and "the washington post" reporting and, frankly, the people doing the negotiating up there on both sides don't know something about the basics of negotiation, starting with the fact that you need one piece of paper that says here's what we agree on and here's what we don't agree on. so the bottom line if i were a ceo, what i'd be worried about is if th
the republican party become a party again the way it was during ronald reagan? i feel that the republican party is just slowly and slowly becoming smaller and smaller and smaller party began throwing people out like me for approval to become republicans and you're not a real republican and things like that and the democratic party is doing the opposite. they were the small party, very small when the 70's and 80's and now they are the inclusive party. latinos are bringing in -- well, the blacks before hand bringing all these other groups in the republican party to switch and start to be more of an inclusive party. >> why don't we take the first question first and come back and close. >> the h-1b visa and the whole process is totally broken. the entire agricultural community, the entire community from growing fruits and such tools to working or anything come agricultural rights thousands and thousands are applied for less than 2% of the work force is improved, visa and a lot of the migratory while baseball there is a 50% work force with 100 percent of their visas are approved. who doesn't work fo
countries have transformed, reform, lower the rates. we haven't touched it since ronald reagan in 1986. bill clinton did raise it at one point but we haven't done anything to touch the rate and reform -- tecum from 16.5% to 15% which most of you are aware of because you do business there, and this capital investment is going to follow countries that have a more competitive environment in taxes is one of them's a we have to reform the tax code and when you do that you will get more revenue. it's guaranteed. again, as i was talking at earlier there are opportunities here for us as a country and if you look at the congressional budget analysts this and go to the tax committee analysis what tax reform could mean in the economic growth and all of them will lead to more growth with this corporate tax reform. estimate of the president says what he did last friday, this was fought over in the campaign and we fought over rising tax rates. jay carney said they would veto any bill that extends the current tax rate so if he insists that tax rates go out for those making over to under $50,000 will would
by finding common ground with the other side. ronald reagan did it with a democratic house after a resounding second term victory. as did bill clinton with the republican controlled house and republican controlled senate after a more resounding second term victory then president obama. both examples, both of them, illustrate the rare opportunity that divided government presents. president obama can follow suit or he can take the extremist view that both reagan and clinton rejected by founding his nose at the other side and insisting that if republicans are not willing to do things his way he will not do anything at all. if the president is serious, he will follow the lead of president reagan and clinton. if he is really serious, he will put the campaign rhetoric aside, propose a realistic resolution that can pass a republican controlled house and a divided senate, and work to get it done. if the president acts in this spirit, i have no doubt he will have the support of his own party and a willing partner in hours. the american people will criticize of relief knowing not only that we have avoi
. there is that incentive as well. you have to look at ronald reagan as well as henry kissinger, when they went into negotiations, said you have to come willing to truly cut a deal. you may get 90%. >> takes both sides. obama is very good in liberal rhetoric blaming republicans. even in "l.a. times", obama wants to help the middle class but republicans don't want to give everything to the rich which is not true. and a lot of liberals are saying this was a mandate to raise taxes? i think people can be pro-choice, pro-day marriage and have fiscal responsibility and live within their means. jon: well, i mean to be honest, angela, the president campaigned on a platform saying i'm going to go back to the bill clinton tax rates and the wealthiest are going to have to pay more money and he won. >> but bill clinton worked with a republican congress and our economy was not in dire straits that it is right now. so if he really wants to go back to the bill clinton days he should go to the table and work with republicans. >> also you have to look taxes were historical high. one of the things they're talkin
-- you can thank ronald reagan and margaret thatcher for doing it. host: this morning, jodie writes in on twitter, the b.p. disaster was made by bip it. there were safety regulars that were ignored. they know what they were doing before it blew up. we'll go to chad now from farmington, new mexico on the republican line. chad, thanks for calling. caller: yeah, thanks for having me. love what you guys have going on. sorry to say but i am a republican. i just had a question, since they already gave you the projected numbers for what they plan on spending everything on, does that show that they just don't plan on giving anybody, any people that were actually affected any money at all? host: what do you mean by that? caller: like, since they already gave the projected numbers of how much money they're spending on each individual group that they gave money to, do they plan on those groups giving the money to the people that actually were affected by it? host: i'll point you back to the "new york times" graphic on this. b.p. has set aside $42 billion to cover the cost related to the spill.
of course was a economic adviser to president ronald reagan, and then has commented on these issues and read about these issues and donald is the director of the urban brookings tax policy center and former acting director of the congressional budget office as well. so we have three experts to talk about these issues and walk us through this minefield of tax policy and see where there might be common ground where the conversations of the white house could be ending up. peter, let me start with you. and the basic question about whether or not tax revenue has to be a part of this part of the conversation to begin with and whether the two sides were there is more common ground than they think. >> first obviously i think the tax revenue has to be part of the solution here both because the underlying budget but also because the election that was just held and the desire and the administration to maintain that additional revenue that they ran on and they won. on the substance though the point that i would make this would ever comes out of this fiscal cliff frankly i am now going to step out of the
is the payback from party leaders? guest: there is change and then there is change. tip o'neill and ronald reagan got together and saved the program. sometimes you need to adjust to change the thing you care most about. tip o'neill did not sell off the democratic party by embracing that. if we do it in a responsible way that doesn't gut the program, i think the base of the party will understand. the alternative is doing nothing with bad damage to the economy, or the right wing of the republicans coming in and taking over and their answer to the solution would be much more draconian. host: jack in kentucky. caller: i have one question. can you guarantee -- guest: i thought you're going to ask why indiana university and kentucky and not playing basketball this year. for the first time they are now playing and we are rivals. i cannot talk about classified information on tv. things like stinger missiles are very problematic and we do everything we can to keep track of them. muammar gaddafi stockpiles of weapons, surface- to-air missiles and we're doing everything to track those down and secure them.
the center. as an independent, i can give advice to both parties. >> ronald reagan and jack kemp -- the party of upward mobility, that didn't seem to be the republican party this year. now, maybe it was because of this very effective attack campaign against mitt romney and bain capital and 47% of all that stuff. but i think hispanics and asians -- and a lot of women, they didn't vote for the republican party not just if you are hispanic because you think their anti-immigrant, but because it doesn't seem like the kind of party that will create a country in which you are were going to have a chance to rise. it seems, by their own statement and also by the definition the democrats gave them, is a more exclusive thing. if republicans don't change that, their future is not good enough let me just say that it he would've been allowed to be out there a little bit more -- he was a jack kemp disciple. i think it's remarkable that we could reelect an african-american president with the name of barack obama at a time when you had almost 9% unemployment in the country was suffering economically. no that
's just that second terms have become synonymous with scandal. richard nixon's second term. ronald reagan's second term. my heart and my best intentions still tell me that's true, but the facts and the evidence tell me it is not. >> the iran contra affair. bill clinton. >> i did not have sexual relations with that woman. impeached after the lewinsky mess. . that's trouble for roughly 100% of reelected presidents since 1972. enough to give you second thoughts about that second term. so, is there anything the obama team can do to prevent this? now, as bill clinton might say -- >> it depends upon what the meaning of the word is. >> the fact is, if there is going to be a second term scandal, it's seeds were probably sewn in the first term. the watergate break in, nixon's first term -- >> if the obama team was going to mess up, history suggests they already did. maybe it's something that has made headlines already, but maybe not, the lewinsky scandal didn't surface in 1998, maybe the obama administration will make it's own history and avoid a second term scandal. if not, disney world will seem
that to us when ronald reagan ran for reelection in 1984, the similar situation he raised money for his primary and the party come even though he took the public general election funding he attended for fundraisers in that year. what are we doing when we have the president running around? as i recall the nevada event after libya was a fundraiser. this is the fourth of his time in office is this election year and a spinning in a fundraisers. romney skeen skeen videotaped it is fundraisers talking about the 47% in a private room with people that's what they want to hear. that's who he's meeting with all the time. so this is a problem for both sides and were going to see the pressure in the house and senate races. >> we only have a minute left, but it does to hear if there is an action of some sort taken to compel disclosure or the higher degree of independence for whatever measures the face. the vision of the future two, three, four cyclists on the road butter politics is going to look like. you were describing a minute ago the growth of the party structure composed of these sorts of orga
's a kind of big confusion here because the classic republican economic vision and the ronald reagan vision and even the dynamic republican revolution vision that you were a part of was really centering on small business and the idea that small business is the idea that creates 75% of the country and it's this dynamic force. people fail, people succeed. things happen and small business is the engine of creation. and there was big business and small business. >> and of course the secret, something all republicans opp e oppose, someone uses regulation as a weapon against other businesses and gets things pass that had are helpful to their specific corporation but harmful to competitors whereas small businesses experience the ownerousness of regulation without a lot of the benefits. this is always a problem that the republican party became affiliated or associated. i think in some large senses wrongly with big business sense. helpful to the obama administration. signed on to obama care. what happened with two of the biggest corporations in the country. too broad of a stroke. we're against regu
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 55 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (31 Dec 2014)